There’s
reluctance among conservatives to see the ideological flaws of the current
crop of president-wannabes but unless we’re willing to line up each
one of the 11 Republican contenders and strip off his 3 piece posturing
to look deep into his political past, we’ll simply be fooling ourselves
(again) when it comes to supporting a candidate for president.

Much
like a woman who wants to get married so badly she ignores those ‘deal-breaking’
flaws, when it comes to the Republicans vying for the nomination, we
just don’t want to face the truth, because well, it would hurt too much
to say, once again, “He’s not for me,” and move on, when there might
not be anyone else to move on to. That kind of thinking always leads
to desperation and ultimately disappointment.

For
those who’ve been saying “he’s good enough, you can’t have everything”
I offer the following perspective of the Republicans in the ’08 lineup.

Mitt
Romney: Nice hair, easy on the eyes, good suits, and lousy standard-bearer
for the pro-life, pro-family, pro-limited government constitutionalist
crowd.

First
off, Romney’s lightning bolt conversion to a pro-life candidate isn’t
fooling many. His RomneyCare health plan, which he signed into law just
over a year ago, forces the taxpayers of Massachusetts to pay for the
gruesome slaughter of thousands of pre-born children in the state each
year.

Romney
campaigned for Governor of Massachusetts as a pro-choice candidate,
and was endorsed by a pro-abortion political group. Regarding his position
on abortion he said: “… [W]hen asked, will I preserve and protect
a women's right to choose, I make an unequivocal answer: Yes.”

If,
after hearing Romney wax conservative in the recent GOP debates you're
confused about Romney's stand on abortion, marriage, gun control, gay
rights or immigration, don’t feel too badly. Up until recently he was
a hard core liberal on all of those issues.

Now
Mitt’s hoping people will pay attention to what he says these days,
not to what he did while governor of Massachusetts. While in office,
Romney:
- supported and promoted legalizing homosexual civil unions
- opposed the Boy Scouts' ban on homosexual scoutmasters
- refused to endorse original Massachusetts’ constitutional amendment
defining marriage as between one man and one woman

In
2002 Romney had this to say about some of the most draconian gun laws
in the nation: “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support
them,” Mitt said. “I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect
us and provide for our safety.”

Fred
Thompson: Sorry folks, the kindly actor you’ve come to know through
the TV series “Law and Order” is not who you’d like him to be. Despite
the polls (AP/ IPSOS 6/9/07) which tout Thompson as a darling among
conservatives, most are apparently ignorant of his political pedigree.
Like his friend, McCain and other GOP leaders, he is a member of the
Council on Foreign Relations, a main group behind the North American
Union.

Thompson’s
“Pro-Life” position in his own words: "Abortions should be legal in
all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first
trimester of the pregnancy.”

After
8 years as a US Senator from Tennessee, Thompson racked up some votes
that should be cause for concern. He voted YES:

1.
in support of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act- the law
to silence grassroots conservative groups.
2. to expand NAFTA. Modeled after the European Common Market, NAFTA
was a first step toward open borders in North America and the North
American Union.
3. on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul
1998)
4. on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002)
5. for permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)
6. for funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
7. to fund the GOP Medicare prescription drug benefit debacle.

Thompson
also seems to believe in a robust military presence worldwide and apparently
advocates continued US military involvement in Iraq. (Freemarket news.com)
Prior to his run for U.S. Senate, he was a Washington lobbyist for 20
years.

Newt
Gingrich: Not even close… In 1995 the 104th Congress’ House of Representatives,
led by Speaker Gingrich was made up of 73 spanking new representatives
who had their sights set on reducing the size, scope and cost of the
federal government. They weren’t allowed to. Gingrich saw to that.

Remember
Newt’s “Contract with America?” While it was portrayed as a way to fix
our country’s problems it did nothing of the sort. The policies therein
were unconstitutional, NATO was expanded, the feds got more control
of law enforcement, laws affecting children and more. Within a year
Gingrich’s approval rating had tanked. CFR member Gingrich tried to
portray himself as a true ‘conservative’ twelve years ago, now he’s
doing it again as a possible candidate for the 2008 GOP presidential
nomination.

Gingrich’s
globalist pedigree was evident back in 1994’s lame-duck session of Congress.
His cheerleading for GATT and the WTO made sure the votes on those two
sovereignty-bludgeoning tools got a pass. The vote on GATT should have
been held off for a month when a more conservative Congress convened
in January of 1995. GATT, that 120 member trade alliance that now dictates
our trade policies has become part of the underpinning for the implementation
of the North American Union. Thanks, Newt. (Seeing a pattern here?)

Gingrich,
in 1978, supported the creation of the Department of Education. Our
kids have been paying for the expansion of federal control over schools
ever since. Can you say: “way down the list of industrialized nations
in math, science and literacy scores?” Sure you can!

After
that, Newt went on to support giving taxpayer money to the evil power
that is Communist China, then voted to approve most-favored-nation trading
status for the regime so fond of murdering political dissidents and
harvesting the organs of those they’ve deemed “criminals.” This, from
the man labeled one of America’s foremost “conservatives.”

Sam
Brownback: Kansas Senator, elected in 1996 to the seat held by Bob
Dole. On marriage Brownback said: “The right to marry is not the right
to redefine marriage. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman.”

Brownback
is staunchly pro-life saying: “Abortion ends a human life.” His votes
have resulted in a 0% rating by NARAL. However, Senator Brownback softens
his otherwise pro-life stance by saying he could support a pro-abortion
nominee for president.

A
voting record indicative of the senator’s decidedly unconstitutional
political positions include:

1.
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.
2. YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe. (NATO does nothing
to protect the United States and again, brings us into foreign alliances
our Founders warned against)
3. YES on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (If you
liked what NAFTA did for the US economy you’ll love CAFTA!)
4. YES on permanent normal trade relations with China.
5. YES on funding GOP Medicare prescription drug debacle.
6. YES on reauthorizing the un-patriotic PATRIOT Act.
7. NO on getting troops out of Iraq by July 2007.

Disappointingly,
Senator Brownback voted to send American troops to fight in Iraq. He’d
do well to read the Constitution; not just because he sits on a House
subcommittee regarding that august document, but, like his colleagues,
he swore an oath to uphold and defend the principles therein; chief
among them, no unauthorized wars. Brownback said that he never read
the National Intelligence Estimate (the justification for the war) in
advance. This lack of preparation is inexcusable.

Mike
Huckabee: Governor of Arkansas for over 10 years, a Southern Baptist
preacher, he’s pro-life, unapologetically Christian and is vocal in
his rejection of the theory of evolution.

Huckabee:
- has been criticized for raising taxes but says he cut taxes 94 times
while in office.
- says he would have made the decision to go to war in Iraq if he were
president.
- supports a guest worker program and has commented that "racism" could
be responsible for those who oppose it.
- signed one of the highest minimum wage laws in the region.

His
“nanny-state” tendencies are evident in his consideration of a law to
ban pregnant women from smoking and his support for laws that require
school children be weighed for obesity.

Advertisement

These
state-level policy decisions are an indication Governor Huckabee takes
a ‘more-is-better’ approach to the federal government’s role. Those
who subscribe to a constitutionally-sound political ideology could not
support Huckabee for president.

“How’s
that working for you” is a phrase TV psychologist and author Dr. Phil
is fond of asking those he counsels. After listening to those troubled
by chaos and failed relationships, Dr. Phil asks the simple question
to make a simple point: Continuing certain behaviors that have repeatedly
failed to produce a desired outcome is just plain nuts. Yet that is
what American voters are considering when they register approval for
candidates like John McCain and Rudy Giuliani.

John
McCain: Anger issues aside, John McCain sponsored a major piece
of legislation so destructive to the republic it’s mind-boggling that
the man could still be considered a “conservative.” These two words
should send chills down the spines of every liberty-loving American:
McCain-Feingold.

The
result of this and most ‘campaign finance reform’ was to make sure that
only the richest people would even consider running for office. By making
it so that a wealthy person couldn’t give more than a couple of thousand
dollars to anyone running for office except himself, now only rich people
will go for it.

The
New York Daily News came up with this estimate of the candidates’ finances:
Mitt Romney $250 million, Rudy Giuliani $70 million, John Edwards $62
million, John McCain $25 million, Sen. Hillary Clinton $15 million,
and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson $10 million.

What
makes the McCain-Feingold bill even worse, much worse, is it effectively
restricts the content of political speech through advocacy groups.

The
Senator from Arizona, one of the states most affected by the flood of
illegals, has totally ignored the folks back home and the severe impact
illegal immigration is having on their daily lives by leading the effort
for the Bush amnesty plan.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Other
inexplicable behavior which should give those contemplating supporting
a McCain candidacy in ’08 pause includes McCain’s opposition to tax
cuts in 2001. McCain sounded like a true Marxist when explaining why
he opposed the cuts saying: "I cannot in good conscience support a tax
cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among
us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief." For
part 2 click below.

She
is currently the Communications Director for the Constitution Party. The
Constitution Party is
the fastest-growing minor political party (www.ballot-access.org)
and is made up of Americans who believe a return to constitutional government
is imperative.